Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    April 1, 2014 9:30am-10:01am PDT

9:30 am
limited scale and impacts people as they become older. i think that although you believe that you have reached stakeholders and your official advisory boards, when i go to senior disability action for example well maybe bob plant a will come and tell us there is going to be a hearing. i haven't seen much interaction and outreach that people tell you that bus stops 3 and 4 blocks apart are ridiculous. people have to navigate to the get there and to say it's not different on people with disabilities is absurd. your customers are people who are disabled. almost the entire bus is full of them. the three i'm glad you are saving. the other night when i was taking
9:31 am
it home from jackson and fillmore there was already a man on a wheelchair on it and a man and woman who walk with a cane. one of my neighbors who used a walker. when you eliminate bus stop she had to take the taxi because she was already doing two 1/2 or three 1/2 blocks. i think it's a shame that there is no outreach in the newspaper. how is the public supposed to know about these changes. one article on the day of the hearing which mentioned 5 lines because you didn't publish anything. >> herbert weiner. these bus lines should not be eliminated or revised. the 33 line should still stop at the general hospital. the 43 line should
9:32 am
stop at the hall of justice for those serving jury duty. the should be on 7th with the provision that the terminal point not be a 15-minute increment street. the line should run to 32nd and gary street. the present proposal eliminates any service on clemente street. these bus stops should not be eliminated. the bus stops at 17 park merced. the bus stops for 28 limited on 19th avenue. the bus stop for the 18 line for the residue -- for the handicap and the san francisco landmark. the 18 line should stop at that as was previously
9:33 am
done. dr. conversesky a geriatrics specialist. this report has been given to the mta board and planners. why did this finding the proposed elimination to the elderly as well as the disabled. instead of making changes and deletions on bus routes on the basis of supply and demand, the proposal should be based on the actual needs for transportation services. police and fire do not operate on the basis of supply and demand but actual need. so should mta. i had time to compliment you on the time to made but you still have a long way to go. thank you. >> next speaker? ga wah. >> good morning commissioners
9:34 am
and mr. riskin and congratulations on mostly pronouncing my name correctly. that's rarely done. my name is am an jawa a conservation representative. i'm very excited for this proposal to move ahead and become part of the mta's actual plan as opposed to plan. this is a systemic change. when you make systemic changes it is risky for individuals, stakeholders and there are a lot of honest concerns in this room that we value and respect. that being said, this is a systematic change and this is the first time in memory that mta has a chance to redesign our muni from the ground up. when you
9:35 am
have systematic changes picking it piece by piece is ineffective. we understand that there are real honest concerns, but i would ask that before we start knit picking apart this entire project, let's implement it and look very carefully at what doesn't work. because on balance it is our belief that these are really really good set of changes and the system of changes will affect 99 percent of muni riders and san franciscans for the better. thank you for your time and thank you for hearing our concerning. we encourage you to support the tep forward. >> hi, my name is marie sorenson. i live on 24th and new hampshire. is this the
9:36 am
street scape meeting also for 24th? okay. i went to the meetings and it appeared that the planners came in with their own agenda. and portrero avenue is a freeway onramp p and off ramp. people drive down it to get on the freeway to go home and when they come into town. so what you are doing is you are going to widen the sidewalks that nobody seems to walk down and you are going to add a bicycle lane that nobody seems to ride on. they claimed at one point 1.50-60 people a day when the reality a few people ride on it. it's a thoroughfare. cars to the freeway, that's what
9:37 am
goes on that way. i'm a bicycle rider. i don't ride on potrero avenue because it's too dangerous. the other thing is 58 parking spots. first it was over 100 and then it was down and then at the last meeting we'll only take out 23 spaces. that was how we left the last meeting. now we are now up to 58. it's just not fair. they are not listening to the neighborhood. when they they would meetings at 33, i swear to god they put the sign up on the day of the meeting and the second meeting was on portrero hill. it's a bus that rides down portrero avenue. today i went to take the 9 down here. i happened to get the 9. the next best was 45 minutes and for the 9 l, it was 48 minutes. if you think
9:38 am
it's going to run faster, good luck. >> good morning ladies and gentlemen. that was an interesting powerpoint and a lot of research into it. not a lot of research near general hospital on portrero avenue. i have lived on potrero for 25 years now across the street from the methadone clinic. it starts at 6:30 in the morning for the written record i'm imitating the movement of the ramp. that goes on for about a minute. anyway, in 25 years parking has been gradually eroded. i commute to work in all weather. i don't really need the bike lanes in potrero avenue. for years i road down
9:39 am
new hampshire street. i will prefer you save the parking spaces. to have it easy close to my home parking has always been a silver lining. i'm concerned about the increase, sexual and verbal assaults in my neighborhood as we walk longer in distance to our parked cars and home and businesses. all in the name of safety and saving time. why does the hospital has 3 blocks east of potrero avenue? are they giving up any of those spaces or are we neighbors the only ones supposed to be sacrificing once again. i have been to many of these meetings. why don't you get rid of the methadone
9:40 am
patients that hang around all day? >> can i have the overhead? >> that's sfgtv. can they get the overhead? >> okay. good morning ladies and gentlemen thank you for hearing me out. my name is joseph saber i live right in the middle of the inner sunset. this is in reference to the paving project. in
9:41 am
particular, the intersection at 9th avenue and irving. the proposal to block two lanes on irving street at 8th avenue would not enhance the timeline and could cause increased traffic and pedestrian safety hazard. inbound train coming off 9th avenue has to come due to traffic on irving and before turning out to irving and stopping at 8th avenue again then it would have to stop. an alternative on the screen to the inbound on the southeast corner, about the sidewalk expand the sidewalk
9:42 am
from irving to the parking public parking driveway, this would allow one 1/2 cars to be loaded directly this would make it three stops. the time savings would be realized. additionally it would free up parking spaces on that northern side. that would have been eliminated by putting in the expanded sidewalk. a side comment. >> your time is up. next speaker.
9:43 am
>> good morning. this you for the opportunity to publically comment. my name is andrea jad win. i'm one of the authors for the letters that you received yesterday signed by some of my other neighbors with the detail about the plan. first of all we do support the tep plan and we think sean -- thank the mta staff. we spent hundreds of hours trying to figure out the bits of this plan and how to support it fully. we do support it, but we have some issues that are still unresolved. we are 80 percent of the way there. we understand this is a fast track plan. we would like to board to consider some of the
9:44 am
changes made here. parking, parking, parking. we thought we had agreement on the bulb outs and mysteriously the bulb outs seem to grow from map to map. they were longer when we thought we had agreement . we would like the board to consider them. it's a massive concrete. it looks terrible. we would like mta to work with us on streetscaping. we are not a transit corridor for san francisco. we are a neighborhood of residents and families and children and pedestrians, streetscaping will make the difference between this project and providing blight to our neighborhood and being fully successful. thank you very
9:45 am
much. >> mary mcgee? good morning. mary mcgee. i'm a red of the mission and work at san francisco general and worked there as a nurse for 26 years. i'm speaking about the elimination of the 23 from potrero avenue corridor down to san francisco general. there are many many gems to the muni system and the no. 9 is not one of them. it's kind of the shame of the muni system. i really really ask you to ride the 9 some morning or late afternoon before you even thinking about eliminating the 33. it is so
9:46 am
over crowded. people are so disabled. if they have to change buses at 16th and potrero they are going to be boarding if they get off the 23 to get on the 9 they are boarding an already crowded bus. you have people with congestive heart failure, people with disabilities and people with wounds and people that go daily for methadone. actually that methadone clinic is a tremendous disservice to san francisco despite it's problems. it would be cruel to eliminate the 33 especially if the changes to the 9 have not been implemented and proven
9:47 am
to work. it would be cruel. consider that. thank you. >> good morning. i'm speaking about the no. 35 bus and hope you won't run on wild street. the reason is sort of three pronged. one is pedestrian safety. there are a huge number of school students who walk on the streets maybe going on field trips or maybe getting exercise. they do that all during the day. there are also a large number of parents bringing their children when they go to the grocery store on the corner. i am somewhat afraid with buses stopping frequently, children that run away when their parents are loaded down with grocery bags
9:48 am
could be endangered. thirdly, the congestion. there are a large number of delivery trucks on wilder street everyday. there are even some as long as 48 feet long. those are awe fully big trucks to try to get around. with people double parking waiting to pick up relatives from bart, at the end of the day, beginning of the day, it's very dangerous. that's it. thank you. >> elliot schwartz. hello, my name is elliot schwartz. my family lives a couple blocks east of portrero avenue. here to speak in favor of the portrero streetscape project. we take our four yield to a
9:49 am
preschool a couple blocks west. i have him on the back of my bike and my wife picks him up on foot. crossing potrero can be scary on foot so the bulbs really help. there is already bike lanes on potrero. it's nice having an extra bit of space when cars are passing. i often see other cyclist ahead of me when i'm walking on potrero. for anyone who says bike lanes aren't used on portrero they aren't seeing them. i'm a lil disappointed that these changes don't go far enough. in 5 or 10 years we'll regret that we are
9:50 am
putting in the reserve lanes for transit in both directions, not just one direction. potrero is an important transit corridor for the 9 and should get the same treatment that van ness and geary are getting. we are going to be sad that we didn't put in bike lanes like other cities like chicago and new york are doing on their arterioles because even a buffer is not enough. thank you very much. i hope you advance the portrero streetscape project. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning, my name is bruce wolf and member of the neighborhood council. you received communication around the 6th. personally i agree, also as a person with a disability. i agree with many of the concerns that are
9:51 am
brought up today. many of my concerns is that i served on the advisory council on the coalition of transit justice. my concerns then and my concerns now is for every change that you put into the tep, there is no cost or savings of time. so when i receive an update and see all of these changes that are proposed, there is no proposed or estimate of time savings for each one of those stops. which would actually give some credibility to it. and so, that's a big concern. another one is most of this is band aid. we have to deal with the system we currently have. we know we need a paradigm shift. we know we have to think about that. this is constantly going on for 6 or 7 years now. it's
9:52 am
time to think about a real paradigm shift that is causing a lot of concern and a lot of convenience and a lot of trouble for people in the city. thank you. >> feldman? good morning. i'm a resident of city of san francisco living here for the last 20 years. i have been struck the lack of proposals on the efficiency measures that could make muni run more effectively and smoothly and increase the speed of the service in general. one of the proposals that struck me as i was sitting nr: here in this room this morning is the addition of
9:53 am
the muni transfer dispensary machines which is the speed installation bus stops where people are able to purchase their tickets prior to boarding their respective mode of transportation which would generally save perhaps one or one 1/2 minutes per bus per stop in my opinion and improve the efficiency of the service. now, on my way to this meeting this morning, i noticed how slow the railcar was moving through the street tunnel. i don't know if this has something to do with the infrastructure, but it just doesn't make sense to spend
9:54 am
close to 10 minutes when you are in an enclosed space. so also whatever changes that you do propose, please consider parking. lackfer parking road conditions are major issues on city streets of san francisco. try to off balance offset whatever proposal you have by additional parking. >> good morning. my name is elias zamary. i'm in favor of most of these changes. it sounds like a great idea. talk about transit first. i'm glad that you are able to do something about it. my brother lives in the upper haight and
9:55 am
used to have to commute to fisherman. wharf and it was 40 minutes each way. i think speeding up the buses would help a lot for anyone trying to get anywhere and entice a large number of people out of their cars. i think i'm in favor of the changes on potrero. the last time i road the no. 9 bus it was ridiculously slow. it stopped at every traffic light. every time it were to start moving it would have to wait for a gap in traffic. i think if the 9 bus would speed up there wouldn't be a need for cars and not a big deal to lose some parking. i'm sick of
9:56 am
muni being slow, stuck in traffic, stuck at red lights and waiting for long periods of time and being told to move to the back of the bus because of crowding and that crowding is going to have an effect of people using it or not to use it or people's ability to use it or told sorry, the bus is full, get on the next bus. >> joseph blaze? good morning. joseph blair, merchant, the sunset, progress hard wafrment -- you are proposing to move the stop on 9 and inbound. that stop has
9:57 am
been there forever. it's the gateway to the park. you are proposing to move it south up 9th and confewest most -- confuse most of the people that come in and all the things that go on in the park for 5 seconds. apparently from mr. white's statement was this is going to save five 5 seconds in the overall 90 seconds that you are trying to achieve. i believe just bumping the bulb out to 1 car on 9th should alleviate that what people are saying about the cars passing the street car at that area. it's dangerous. something will occur. but bumping it out to
9:58 am
1 car would looefd -- alleviate and the amount of cars and deliveries is going to cause i think a parking lot on 9th. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> dennis miss scoffian. good morning my name is dennis moss scoffian and i sent you a letter. here is an extra copy in case you didn't have it. through an extensive process working with shawn cattle,
9:59 am
we worked out a consensus of numbers of key to the neighborhood. as andrea said understanding from your point of view the transit is most important. it's not just a corridor, it's not just a through way. i live there. i'm a native san franciscans and a mile from my grammar school. i lived here bn -- before there was a district 5. we grew what we knew. shawn and others don't live where we live. in large measure what is reflective is the consensus we reach is reflected in the agenda. however it skipped a couple place. the length of the bulb bounce wednesday to
10:00 am
taking 3 to four or 5 parking spaces. here is an extra copy for you in that letter. there are several things that we think is really important that are details that you need to pay attention to and consider one aspect. we still recognize that despite the fact that it is really important for people to ride bikes. there is all these reasons to drive cars too. i would ask you to look at agenda m and tell you that you don't need the corner on irving and reduce that to 8th and look at the remaining items we spelled out. thank you. >> laurie leader man. good morning, my name is laurie leader man and